On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 20:21 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > I'm not sure it's a solution Debian can advertise.
I know it's not, that is why later down the discussion we brought up the installer giving people the option to either choose the kernel or building a script that will check for PAE and go from there. > That's not the point (and tbh, I don't run any i386 kernel anyway). But > we do have users which will have issues, and we do have a -bigmem kernel > which can be used for needing users. So yes I agree a way to propose the > -bigmem to users needing it would be nice, but I don't think setting it > the default kernel would work. But I basically see i386 as “the kernel > of the last chance”. Read above. It was not meant to be a point, but a mere example. You can't stay legacy forever (well you /can/ but why would you want to?) and I think giving users the choice is the best step with a pro being NX that PAE can bring if the CPU supports it. > Was that really necessary? Yes, because out of context replies are out of context. While it should have not so blunt (which I am really working on ~ you should have seen the way I would have replied a year ago) it had to be brought up :P -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1287081333.14513.16.ca...@envygeeks
